Thursday, February 09, 2012

A Republican State Representative in New Hampshire has found a way to create a new front in the war on workers, proposing a bill that would repeal the state’s law requiring that workers get a 30-minute lunch break after five hours of labor.

State Rep. J.R. Hoell (R), a supporter of libertarian-leaning Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) for president, told a New Hampshire General Court committee this week that he believes the law is unnecessary because it is in employers’ interest to treat workers well, according to The Concord Monitor. ...

In fact, now that I think of it, bank laws are stupid. Because it's in a bank's interest to stay solvent. (And if one overreaches and goes bankrupt, it will have to suffer the free-market consequences. Oh, wait! ...)

But now allow me a counter-argument, from personal experience.

Back in the prosperous nineties, I got into an argument with a Disney exec who took exception to my complaints about employees having a "working lunch" from twelve to noon one. When I pointed out that if Feature Animation was making the merry workers attend a meeting, then it wasn't really "lunch."

Her response was: "But we're supplying food!"

(A second exec finally conceded my point that it wasn't really a "lunch break.")

So, when I run across an Ayn Rand disciple who maintains that things will be much better if we just got rid of all the rules and regulations and let our fine conglomerates (and everyone else) pursue their enlightened self-interest, my answer is always monotonously the same:

As per the above politician, that's libertarians for you. On the other hand, Democrats want those who make a living to support everyone who isn't, and Republicans...well, they basically, uh...well, they basically are better than the other two. Go Santorum!

> I think the union should stop talking politics of any kind and should not use the members due to support any candidate.

The whole point of a union is to protect the rights and interests of its members. How is reporting on the potential danger of losing your lunch break beyond the pale of this responsibility? I suppose you just come here for the PIXAR/DISNEY/DREAMWORKS flame wars?

Unfortunately, the perfect 'market' that Libertarians and fiscal conservatives always point to demands the flexibility to do whatever the hell you need to do to people and the planet in order to make money and stay afloat. Pretty much what an individual has to do to get by in life - hustle. They want full rights to hustle as corporations. But workers don't give a crap, they're too busy hustling themselves as they move from job to job, paycheck to paycheck, and demand the same flexibility to make money and to stay afloat. So no one talks to each other, instead choosing to lobby the government to fight for their respective rights as employers and as workers.

Companies use money and lobbying as leverage, unions use bodies and lobbying as leverage, with not nearly the same amount of cash. Corporations overspend to get what they want the same way rich people spend too much on wine they think is better but isn't. But they get results, so who cares at the end of the day, right? Just throw mountains of cash at CPAC and see what sticks. Unions spend some, but make the money count more, and use bodies for action like no other. Economists should be singing the praises of labor the way they make their dollars stretch. Unions are always against the fence in this country, yet to businesses, it's a stone in their shoe they can't get rid of completely. It drives them crazy to have us even breathing. And the more they point the finger at the public sector, which is a small portion of the economy, the bigger they make the threat, and it is self-fulfilling.Meanwhile, we all continue to go broke.